Communities For A New California Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451636468
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Granite Bay, CA, USA
Phone
5108627371
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,559,221
Expenses
$5,037,549
Assets
$3,719,361
Liabilities
$1,346,791

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Pablo Rodriquez (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Pablo Rodriquez (Executive Director): $82,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide charitable assistance to underrepresented communities and the general public by providing non-partisan voter registration and mobilization, capacity building and educational activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program #1 STATEWIDE: CNC EF launched the READY Reps program to strengthen disaster preparedness in underrepresented California neighborhoods. CNC EF partnered with 15 community-based organizations, and trained trusted leaders to organize workshops, house meetings, and door-to door outreach. This people-centered model built trust and resilience through culturally relevant and accessible engagement. READY Reps focuses on local relationships ensuring long-term disaster preparedness and stronger local response to wildfires, floods, heat, and other natural disaster threats. Phonebanking: Ready Reps Program (20242025) Communities for a New California Education Fund implemented a statewide live phone outreach program for the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). The program educated residents in all 58 counties on emergency preparedness and increased Wireless Emergency Alert sign-ups. Outreach prioritized vulnerable populations, tailoring education to local risks like wildfires, floods, and extreme heat. Specialists provided practical steps, culturally relevant materials, and personalized guidance for seniors, and rural families.This equity-informed, statewide initiative strengthened preparedness, community trust, and resilience through direct, empathetic communication.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.